Analysis: What punishments did
Frederick Ward receive on Cockatoo Island?
Many Thunderbolt books make astonishing claims about Fred Ward’s servitude on Cockatoo Island during the years 1856 to 1860 and 1861 to 1863, with some reporting frequent or extraordinarily long stints in the solitary confinement cells and even floggings. At best, these claims are based on anecdotes and gossip – perhaps even tall stories told by Fred himself. At worst, they are simply the imaginings of the author.
For example, most Thunderbolt books mention the claims made by Jules Joubert in his memoir, Shaving and Scrapes from many parts (shown below).[1] These were repeated in Bob Cummins' Thunderbolt who began by stating that "Visiting Magistrate Joules (sic) Joubert recollected a decision he adjudicated regarding an attempted escape by Ward".[2] Stephan Williams in A Ghost called Thunderbolt wrote that "a visiting police magistrate recalled seeing Ward being summarily committed to 21 days' solitary confinement for trying to escape".[3] Jim Hobden in Thunderbolt qualified his own version of the events by stating that "Ward's case was said to have attracted the attention of a French-born magistrate, Jules Joubert."[4]
So what did Joubert actually say?
For example, most Thunderbolt books mention the claims made by Jules Joubert in his memoir, Shaving and Scrapes from many parts (shown below).[1] These were repeated in Bob Cummins' Thunderbolt who began by stating that "Visiting Magistrate Joules (sic) Joubert recollected a decision he adjudicated regarding an attempted escape by Ward".[2] Stephan Williams in A Ghost called Thunderbolt wrote that "a visiting police magistrate recalled seeing Ward being summarily committed to 21 days' solitary confinement for trying to escape".[3] Jim Hobden in Thunderbolt qualified his own version of the events by stating that "Ward's case was said to have attracted the attention of a French-born magistrate, Jules Joubert."[4]
So what did Joubert actually say?
 |
 Was Joubert telling the truth? The first detection strategy is to determine the likely accuracy of the unknown information – in this case, if Fred could have indeed been sentenced to 21 days in the cells by Joubert et al – by assessing the accuracy of the known information (I know I keep banging on about this simple rule of thumb, but if everyone followed this strategy to help them determine the truth regarding myths and secondary-source references, the Thunderbolt myths would not keep being repeated as facts).
What do we find? Joubert said: “I had not recognised the prisoner as Ward (Captain Thunderbolt), whom I had often seen on the Victorian diggings.” The alarm bells should be ringing! A few pages previously, Joubert had written: “For eight months I was hardly ever out of the saddle. During that time I experienced many adventures with men who since have either forfeited their life at the hands of the public hangman or served long sentences in H.M.’s gaol. Black Douglas, Thunderbolt, Donoghue, Gilbert, Ben Hall, and many other such celebrities have often been my fellow-travellers. Many a night have I spent at the camp-fire with such noted characters, yet have never been molested or stuck-up them.”[4a] |
The alarm bells should be clanging!! Yes, Joubert was one of “those” people; that is, the men (and women) who claim to have important “friends” in a desperate attempt to seem important themselves. Joubert’s biography in the Australian Dictionary of Biography refers to him as an “adventurer and entrepreneur”. Evidently he was adventurous with the truth in addition to his other activities.
So what about his claims that Joubert attended Cockatoo Island as a magistrate and saw Fred sentenced to 21 days in the cells? I'll come back to that in a moment.
So what about his claims that Joubert attended Cockatoo Island as a magistrate and saw Fred sentenced to 21 days in the cells? I'll come back to that in a moment.
|
Another publication that makes noteworthy claims about Fred's punishments while on Cockatoo Island is the novel Thunderbolt: Scourge of the Ranges? Yes, we know it is "fictional" but the authors stridently claimed in the press that it is grounded in fact,[4b] so let's look at their statements about Fred's punishments on Cockatoo Island.
Regarding the solitary confinement cells, the authors wrote (see adjacent) that Fred spent so much time in the cells that he lost track of his stays, and that, while the average stay was 24 hours, he was spending up to a week each time.[5] The authors also state that Fred was strung up to the triangle and whipped fifty times because: "He needs to be reminded who's in charge here. He needs to have some respect."[6] They even intimated that he was raped.[6a] |
 |
One thing soon becomes obvious about the claims made by Joubert and the Scourge authors: they are not based upon any actual evidence. References to Cockatoo Island punishments have survived and these tell a completely different story about Fred’s servitude there.
First of all, let’s dismiss the claim that Fred was flogged. None of the prisoners were, by that time. Attitudes to punishment had changed. Flogging the mind (that is, solitary confinement) had replaced flogging the body.[7]
Secondly, the fact that the Scourge authors only intimated that Fred was raped when they boldly stated that he was flogged – even though the evidence shows quite the opposite – suggests that they knew they were on shaky ground with a rape claim!
Thirdly, the solitary confinement cells on Cockatoo Island bore little resemblance to those described by the authors of Scourge (see Earliest Convict Cells found on Cockatoo Island).
Now to Fred’s actual punishments.
In 1858, Fred petitioned the government for a conditional pardon. The authorities asked the Cockatoo Island superintendent for conduct details; he reported back that Fred had received a three-day stint in the solitary confinement cells for “neglect of duty as a Wardsman – being asleep at his post” on 20 October 1857. This punishment also added three days to the length of his sentence.[8]
Which raises an important point in itself. Under the regulations in force when Fred was convicted in 1856, every day he worked reduced his sentence by one-and-a-half days. Every day he spent in the cells not only meant that he was unable to reduce his sentence; it actually extended his sentence by the same amount of time.[7] Only a fool – or one incapable of controlling his own behaviour – would behave badly. Fred was no fool.
The Cockatoo Island Punishment Book has survived from 1859 onwards and records no further punishments prior to Fred’s receipt of a ticket-of-leave in mid-1860.[9] Tickets-of-leave were, of course, granted only to those who worked hard and behaved well, thereby reducing the amount of time they had to serve.[7] That Fred had indeed behaved well is also confirmed by the fact that he was assigned to the duty of “constable of the cells” – a responsible position – soon after his return to Cockatoo Island.[10]
So how do the Scourge authors account for Fred's receipt of such an indulgence when they state that he spent so much time in the cells he lost track of the days, etc, etc? They do so by stating that Minister Parkes intervened on his behalf![11] Confirmatory evidence? None.
In 1861, Fred’s ticket-of-leave was revoked and he was sentenced to serve the remainder of his first sentence plus an additional three years for possessing a stolen horse.[12] Changes in prison regulations meant that he would have to serve the full term of each sentence; no longer could a prisoner receive a remission for hard work and good behaviour.[7] The prisoners were angry about the regulatory changes. They rebelled in January 1863 and Fred was among them. While his resulting punishment was specified as “solitary confinement” – plus additional stints of “solitary confinement” when he refused to go back to work – there were not enough solitary confinement cells for all the rebels. Only the ringleaders were confined to the cells; the others were locked in a ward. Fred was ultimately confined to the ward for more than six weeks until he agreed to go back to work.[12]
Previously, on 6 May 1862, Fred had been confined to the cells at night for allegedly tampering with the cell locks while performing his duties as constable of the cells. The charges themselves seem suspect and his case was dismissed nine days later.[13]
Clearly, despite the claims made by writers trying to sensationalise Fred's story, Fred spent only a three-day stint in the solitary confinement cells in October 1857 for falling asleep on the job, between two and nine nights in the cells in May 1862 on charges that seem based more on malicious intent than illicit activity (hence their dismissal), and six-and-a-half weeks confined to a ward in January-February 1863 for refusing to work. These were his only punishments during his six years on Cockatoo Island.
The reality is that Fred was neither ill-behaved nor intransigent. During his first term of incarceration he was a model prisoner rewarded with a responsible position, whose only infraction was to fall asleep during night duty. During his second term of incarceration he became angry at the system and joined others in what was essentially a "strike". When that failed to achieve the desired end, he fled.
Fred's actual behaviour provides a more interesting insight into his character than the behaviour attributed to him in sensationalised accounts.
First of all, let’s dismiss the claim that Fred was flogged. None of the prisoners were, by that time. Attitudes to punishment had changed. Flogging the mind (that is, solitary confinement) had replaced flogging the body.[7]
Secondly, the fact that the Scourge authors only intimated that Fred was raped when they boldly stated that he was flogged – even though the evidence shows quite the opposite – suggests that they knew they were on shaky ground with a rape claim!
Thirdly, the solitary confinement cells on Cockatoo Island bore little resemblance to those described by the authors of Scourge (see Earliest Convict Cells found on Cockatoo Island).
Now to Fred’s actual punishments.
In 1858, Fred petitioned the government for a conditional pardon. The authorities asked the Cockatoo Island superintendent for conduct details; he reported back that Fred had received a three-day stint in the solitary confinement cells for “neglect of duty as a Wardsman – being asleep at his post” on 20 October 1857. This punishment also added three days to the length of his sentence.[8]
Which raises an important point in itself. Under the regulations in force when Fred was convicted in 1856, every day he worked reduced his sentence by one-and-a-half days. Every day he spent in the cells not only meant that he was unable to reduce his sentence; it actually extended his sentence by the same amount of time.[7] Only a fool – or one incapable of controlling his own behaviour – would behave badly. Fred was no fool.
The Cockatoo Island Punishment Book has survived from 1859 onwards and records no further punishments prior to Fred’s receipt of a ticket-of-leave in mid-1860.[9] Tickets-of-leave were, of course, granted only to those who worked hard and behaved well, thereby reducing the amount of time they had to serve.[7] That Fred had indeed behaved well is also confirmed by the fact that he was assigned to the duty of “constable of the cells” – a responsible position – soon after his return to Cockatoo Island.[10]
So how do the Scourge authors account for Fred's receipt of such an indulgence when they state that he spent so much time in the cells he lost track of the days, etc, etc? They do so by stating that Minister Parkes intervened on his behalf![11] Confirmatory evidence? None.
In 1861, Fred’s ticket-of-leave was revoked and he was sentenced to serve the remainder of his first sentence plus an additional three years for possessing a stolen horse.[12] Changes in prison regulations meant that he would have to serve the full term of each sentence; no longer could a prisoner receive a remission for hard work and good behaviour.[7] The prisoners were angry about the regulatory changes. They rebelled in January 1863 and Fred was among them. While his resulting punishment was specified as “solitary confinement” – plus additional stints of “solitary confinement” when he refused to go back to work – there were not enough solitary confinement cells for all the rebels. Only the ringleaders were confined to the cells; the others were locked in a ward. Fred was ultimately confined to the ward for more than six weeks until he agreed to go back to work.[12]
Previously, on 6 May 1862, Fred had been confined to the cells at night for allegedly tampering with the cell locks while performing his duties as constable of the cells. The charges themselves seem suspect and his case was dismissed nine days later.[13]
Clearly, despite the claims made by writers trying to sensationalise Fred's story, Fred spent only a three-day stint in the solitary confinement cells in October 1857 for falling asleep on the job, between two and nine nights in the cells in May 1862 on charges that seem based more on malicious intent than illicit activity (hence their dismissal), and six-and-a-half weeks confined to a ward in January-February 1863 for refusing to work. These were his only punishments during his six years on Cockatoo Island.
The reality is that Fred was neither ill-behaved nor intransigent. During his first term of incarceration he was a model prisoner rewarded with a responsible position, whose only infraction was to fall asleep during night duty. During his second term of incarceration he became angry at the system and joined others in what was essentially a "strike". When that failed to achieve the desired end, he fled.
Fred's actual behaviour provides a more interesting insight into his character than the behaviour attributed to him in sensationalised accounts.
Sources:
[1] Joubert, Jules Shaving and Scrapes from distant parts, pp.47-8
[2] Cummins, Bob Thunderbolt, self-published, 1988, p.20
[3] Williams, Stephan A Ghost called Thunderbolt, Popinjay, 1987, p. 23
[4] Hobden, Jim Thunderbolt, self-published, 1987, p.10
[4a] Joubert, Jules Shaving and Scrapes from distant parts, p.41
[4b] See Blog post Comments
[5] Hamilton, G. James with Sinclair, Barry Thunderbolt: Scourge of the Ranges, Phoenix Press, 2009, p.78
[6] ibid, p.88
[6a] ibid, p.85
[7] Votes and Proceedings of the Legislative Assembly: Minutes of Evidence taken before the Select Committee on the Public Prisons in Sydney and Cumberland, 1861, Vol. 1, pp.1061-1282
[8] CSIL: Petition of Frederick Ward, 1858 [SRNSW ref: 4/549 Item 65/1712 No.58/1399]; CSIL: Convict Department to Principal Under-Secretary, 13 Jun 1860 [SRNSW ref: 4/3424 No.60/2462]
[9] Cockatoo Island – Punishment Book [SRNSW ref: 4/6502]; Ticket-of-Leave: Frederick Ward [SRNSW ref: 4/4233 No.60/28; Reel 893]
[10] Cockatoo Island - Daily State of the Establishment [SRNSW ref: 4/6505, 6 May 1862]
[11] Hamilton, G. James with Sinclair, Barry Thunderbolt: Scourge of the Ranges, Phoenix Press, 2009, pp.89-90
[12] See Timeline 1835-1863
[13] Cockatoo Island - Punishment Book [SRNSW ref: 4/6502, 8 & 15 May 1862]; Cockatoo Island - Daily State of the Establishment [SRNSW ref: 4/6505, 6 May 1862]